Posted May 23, 200619 yr Anti-war signs seized by police Police said there were allegations Mr Haw had breached legal conditions Police have removed placards from peace activist Brian Haw at the scene of his five-year vigil outside Parliament. Officers went to Parliament Square in the early hours of Tuesday to deal with alleged breaches of Mr Haw's demonstration conditions. Mr Haw, 56, from Worcestershire, said he will fast in protest at the action. Earlier this month Court of Appeal judges overturned a ruling that allowed him to carry out his protest, which he began in June 2001. Mr Haw said: "It seems I am going to die in this place now because I'm going to be fasting and praying. What gives them the legal right to remove 40 metres of evidence of genocide Brian Haw "They have left me with just one placard. All of my personal belongings have been taken and dumped in a container along with nearly all the displays. "They have completely destroyed all the expressions of people who opposed the war in Iraq. "What gives them the legal right to remove 40 metres of evidence of genocide and reduce it to just three metres?" Police overpowered two supporters who had climbed on top of a metal container at the side of the square to blow whistles and wave a banner declaring 'Freedom of expression over political repression'. A Metropolitan Police spokeswoman said officers removed the placards at 0235 BST over claims that Mr Haw had continually breached conditions of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. Police overpowered two of Brian Haw's supporters She said: "This action follows a number of requests to the applicant to adhere to the conditions, which he has failed to comply with." The legislation bans unauthorised protests within a 1km zone of Parliament Square and requires any permitted protests to cover no more than three metres. It was brought in last year with the specific intent of forcing Mr Haw to abandon his post. But so far, it is only placards that have been moved, not Mr Haw himself. It is understood that any decision on eviction may be decided at Bow Street Magistrates' Court next Tuesday when he will face allegations that he breached protest conditions. In the meantime, Mr Haw plans to petition the Law Lords directly in an attempt to take his case further. Mr Haw has slept in Parliament Square among a large display of anti-war banners, placards and flags, many presented to him by well-wishers. But such a permanent fixture proved an irritant to his neighbours in the House of Commons. Source BBC London B/astards... Utter b/astards.....Doing B-Liar's bidding......I don't pay my bloody taxes so Police can bust up a perfectly peaceful protest, I pay these c**ts to actually fight crime..... :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
May 23, 200619 yr To be fair to the police they only enforce the law they don't make the law, the police are just doing their job, far more likely they were acting under orders from John Reid himself so Reid would have phoned Ian Blair who would in turn instruct officers to deal with the matter The one to have a go at is John Reid, the officers on the ground would not have made the decision and would have likely lost their jobs if they hadn't enforced it
May 23, 200619 yr yeah it seems rather disturbing, after all its not as if real[i/] crimes have all been solved is it! <_<
May 23, 200619 yr Author That's a bit ofa get out clause, Oz, if enough coppers had actually gotten together to say "No, we are not going to enforce this on a man who has won a peace prize" then I reckon they would've had to back off, otherwise face a possible revolt in the Police force.. But of course the Met coppers are just too bloody pig-ignorant to think on any kind of actual ethical level... "I was only following orders" aint an excuse as far as I'm concerned mate, if those orders are fundamentally wrong and have been brought in to further a political dogma; the police's job is not to follow the orders of a particular Govt, they are there to protect society at large (and they do so by the consent of the British public); Brian Haw is no danger to society, he is not a terrorist or a criminal.... But essentially, I do agree with your basic point, the real villians of the piece are the Govt, the law seems fundamentally to have been brought in to actually target this one individual in particular - it is that specific....
May 23, 200619 yr Author yeah it seems rather disturbing, after all its not as if real[i/] crimes have all been solved is it! <_< It's incredibly disturbing. We're supposedly fighting this "war" to "spread democracy" and our Govt is, in our name, sending in the plods to beat up peaceful protestors and deny them freedom of speech - Christ, I had to pinch myself to make sure I hadn't suddenly woken up in China, McCarthy-era America or Stalinist Russia... ..Or indeed, Saddam's Iraq..... <_< As Edward R Murrow once said - "We cannot fight for the cause of freedom abroad, by abandoning it at home"
Create an account or sign in to comment